quantized tensor: add support for advanced indexing by vkuzo · Pull Request #49129 · pytorch/pytorch

vkuzo · 2020-12-10T00:57:24Z

Stack from ghstack:

quantized tensor: add support for advanced indexing #49129 quantized tensor: add support for advanced indexing

Summary:

Implements support for the indexing of quantized tensors with lists of
dims, such as

xq_slice = xq[:, [0], :, :]

If helpful for reviewers, the things originally broken were, in order:

computeDeviceType did not handle DispatchKey::QuantizedCPU (fix: added)
quantization params were not present in TensorIterator::set_output so they can be used to properly create the quantized tensor (fix: created TensorQuantizationOptions and threaded it through the relevant places)
index kernel was not enabled for quantized dtypes (fix: enable it)

Note: this PR only handles per-Tensor qparams. We don't expect to need this for per-channel qparams any time soon, ideally we can pay the eng cost for enabling that when it is needed.

Test Plan:

python test/test_quantization.py TestQuantizedOps.test_advanced_indexing

Reviewers:

Subscribers:

Tasks:

Tags:

Differential Revision: D25451651

Summary: Implements support for the indexing of quantized tensors with lists of dims, such as ``` xq_slice = xq[:, [0], :, :] ``` At least a few things need to happen before this being ready for review: 1. Verify if the general idea of `TensorAdditionalOptions` is the right abstraction 2. Verify if `TensorAdditionalOptions` needs the same style as `TensorOptions` (no optionals, etc) Test Plan: ``` python test/test_quantization.py TestQuantizedOps.test_advanced_indexing ``` Reviewers: Subscribers: Tasks: Tags: [ghstack-poisoned]

Summary: Implements support for the indexing of quantized tensors with lists of dims, such as ``` xq_slice = xq[:, [0], :, :] ``` At least a few things need to happen before this being ready for review: 1. Verify if the general idea of `TensorAdditionalOptions` is the right abstraction 2. Verify if `TensorAdditionalOptions` needs the same style as `TensorOptions` (no optionals, etc) Test Plan: ``` python test/test_quantization.py TestQuantizedOps.test_advanced_indexing ``` Reviewers: Subscribers: Tasks: Tags: ghstack-source-id: 9242ec9 Pull Request resolved: #49129

dr-ci · 2020-12-10T01:17:28Z

💊 CI failures summary and remediations

As of commit a75af59 (more details on the Dr. CI page):

4/4 failures possibly* introduced in this PR
- 1/4 non-CircleCI failure(s)

🕵️ 3 new failures recognized by patterns

The following CI failures do not appear to be due to upstream breakages:

pytorch_linux_xenial_py3_6_gcc5_4_build (1/3)

Step: "Build" (full log | diagnosis details | 🔁 rerun)

Dec 14 20:51:14 collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status

Dec 14 20:51:12 make[1]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....
Dec 14 20:51:12 [ 86%] Linking CXX executable ../bin/conv_to_nnpack_transform_test
Dec 14 20:51:13 /var/lib/jenkins/workspace/build/lib/libtorch_cpu.so: undefined reference to `c10::impl::raw_local_dispatch_key_set'
Dec 14 20:51:13 collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status
Dec 14 20:51:13 caffe2/CMakeFiles/conv_to_nnpack_transform_test.dir/build.make:105: recipe for target 'bin/conv_to_nnpack_transform_test' failed
Dec 14 20:51:13 make[2]: *** [bin/conv_to_nnpack_transform_test] Error 1
Dec 14 20:51:13 CMakeFiles/Makefile2:5350: recipe for target 'caffe2/CMakeFiles/conv_to_nnpack_transform_test.dir/all' failed
Dec 14 20:51:13 make[1]: *** [caffe2/CMakeFiles/conv_to_nnpack_transform_test.dir/all] Error 2
Dec 14 20:51:13 [ 86%] Linking CXX executable ../bin/depthwise3x3_conv_op_test
Dec 14 20:51:14 /var/lib/jenkins/workspace/build/lib/libtorch_cpu.so: undefined reference to `c10::impl::raw_local_dispatch_key_set'
Dec 14 20:51:14 collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status
Dec 14 20:51:14 make[2]: *** [bin/depthwise3x3_conv_op_test] Error 1
Dec 14 20:51:14 caffe2/CMakeFiles/depthwise3x3_conv_op_test.dir/build.make:105: recipe for target 'bin/depthwise3x3_conv_op_test' failed
Dec 14 20:51:14 CMakeFiles/Makefile2:5436: recipe for target 'caffe2/CMakeFiles/depthwise3x3_conv_op_test.dir/all' failed
Dec 14 20:51:14 make[1]: *** [caffe2/CMakeFiles/depthwise3x3_conv_op_test.dir/all] Error 2
Dec 14 20:51:14 Makefile:138: recipe for target 'all' failed
Dec 14 20:51:14 make: *** [all] Error 2
Dec 14 20:51:14 -- Building version 1.8.0a0
Dec 14 20:51:14 cmake -DBUILD_ENVIRONMENT=pytorch-linux-xenial-py3.6-gcc5.4-build -DBUILD_PYTHON=True -DBUILD_TEST=True -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release -DCMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX=/var/lib/jenkins/workspace/torch -DCMAKE_PREFIX_PATH=/opt/conda/lib/python3.6/site-packages -DNUMPY_INCLUDE_DIR=/opt/conda/lib/python3.6/site-packages/numpy/core/include -DPYTHON_EXECUTABLE=/opt/conda/bin/python -DPYTHON_INCLUDE_DIR=/opt/conda/include/python3.6m -DPYTHON_LIBRARY=/opt/conda/lib/libpython3.6m.so.1.0 -DTORCH_BUILD_VERSION=1.8.0a0 -DUSE_LLVM=/opt/llvm -DUSE_NUMPY=True -DWERROR=1 /var/lib/jenkins/workspace
Dec 14 20:51:14 cmake --build . --target install --config Release -- -j 3
Dec 14 20:51:14 Traceback (most recent call last):

pytorch_linux_xenial_cuda9_2_cudnn7_py3_gcc5_4_build (2/3)

Step: "Build" (full log | diagnosis details | 🔁 rerun)

Dec 14 17:31:42 sccache: error: couldn't connect to server

Dec 14 17:31:42 +++ eval 'extract_trap_cmd '
Dec 14 17:31:42 ++++ extract_trap_cmd
Dec 14 17:31:42 ++++ printf '%s\n' ''
Dec 14 17:31:42 +++ printf '%s\n' cleanup
Dec 14 17:31:42 ++ trap -- '
Dec 14 17:31:42 cleanup' EXIT
Dec 14 17:31:42 ++ [[ pytorch-linux-xenial-cuda9.2-cudnn7-py3-gcc5.4-build != *pytorch-win-* ]]
Dec 14 17:31:42 ++ which sccache
Dec 14 17:31:42 ++ sccache --stop-server
Dec 14 17:31:42 Stopping sccache server...
Dec 14 17:31:42 sccache: error: couldn't connect to server
Dec 14 17:31:42 sccache: caused by: Connection refused (os error 111)
Dec 14 17:31:42 ++ true
Dec 14 17:31:42 ++ rm /var/lib/jenkins/sccache_error.log
Dec 14 17:31:42 rm: cannot remove '/var/lib/jenkins/sccache_error.log': No such file or directory
Dec 14 17:31:42 ++ true
Dec 14 17:31:42 ++ [[ pytorch-linux-xenial-cuda9.2-cudnn7-py3-gcc5.4-build == *rocm* ]]
Dec 14 17:31:42 ++ SCCACHE_ERROR_LOG=/var/lib/jenkins/sccache_error.log
Dec 14 17:31:42 ++ SCCACHE_IDLE_TIMEOUT=1200
Dec 14 17:31:42 ++ RUST_LOG=sccache::server=error
Dec 14 17:31:42 ++ sccache --start-server

pytorch_linux_xenial_py3_clang5_asan_test2 (3/3)

Step: "Run tests" (full log | diagnosis details | 🔁 rerun)

Dec 14 21:16:09 RuntimeError: test_quantization failed!

Dec 14 21:16:07 Generated XML report: test-reports/dist-gloo/TEST-quantization.test_quantized_tensor.TestQuantizedTensor-20201214204712.xml
Dec 14 21:16:07 Generated XML report: test-reports/dist-gloo/TEST-quantization.test_workflow_module.TestRecordHistogramObserver-20201214204712.xml
Dec 14 21:16:07 Generated XML report: test-reports/dist-gloo/TEST-quantization.test_backward_compatibility.TestSerialization-20201214204712.xml
Dec 14 21:16:07 Generated XML report: test-reports/dist-gloo/TEST-quantization.test_quantized_module.TestStaticQuantizedModule-20201214204712.xml
Dec 14 21:16:07 Generated XML report: test-reports/dist-gloo/TEST-quantization.test_quantized_op.TestQNNPackOps-20201214204712.xml
Dec 14 21:16:09 Traceback (most recent call last):
Dec 14 21:16:09   File "test/run_test.py", line 896, in <module>
Dec 14 21:16:09     main()
Dec 14 21:16:09   File "test/run_test.py", line 879, in main
Dec 14 21:16:09     raise RuntimeError(err_message)
Dec 14 21:16:09 RuntimeError: test_quantization failed!
Dec 14 21:16:09 + cleanup
Dec 14 21:16:09 + retcode=1
Dec 14 21:16:09 + set +x
Dec 14 21:16:09 =================== sccache compilation log ===================
Dec 14 21:16:09 =========== If your build fails, please take a look at the log above for possible reasons ===========
Dec 14 21:16:10 Compile requests                      0
Dec 14 21:16:10 Compile requests executed             0
Dec 14 21:16:10 Cache hits                            0
Dec 14 21:16:10 Cache misses                          0
Dec 14 21:16:10 Cache timeouts                        0

This comment was automatically generated by Dr. CI (expand for details).

Follow this link to opt-out of these comments for your Pull Requests.

Please report bugs/suggestions to the (internal) Dr. CI Users group.

This comment has been revised 17 times.

Summary: Implements support for the indexing of quantized tensors with lists of dims, such as ``` xq_slice = xq[:, [0], :, :] ``` At least a few things need to happen before this being ready for review: 1. Verify if the general idea of `TensorAdditionalOptions` is the right abstraction 2. Verify if `TensorAdditionalOptions` needs the same style as `TensorOptions` (no optionals, etc) Test Plan: ``` python test/test_quantization.py TestQuantizedOps.test_advanced_indexing ``` Reviewers: Subscribers: Tasks: Tags: Differential Revision: [D25451651](https://our.internmc.facebook.com/intern/diff/D25451651) [ghstack-poisoned]

Summary: Implements support for the indexing of quantized tensors with lists of dims, such as ``` xq_slice = xq[:, [0], :, :] ``` At least a few things need to happen before this being ready for review: 1. Verify if the general idea of `TensorAdditionalOptions` is the right abstraction 2. Verify if `TensorAdditionalOptions` needs the same style as `TensorOptions` (no optionals, etc) Test Plan: ``` python test/test_quantization.py TestQuantizedOps.test_advanced_indexing ``` Reviewers: Subscribers: Tasks: Tags: ghstack-source-id: 10e51c5 Pull Request resolved: #49129

ezyang · 2020-12-11T15:53:50Z

aten/src/ATen/TensorIterator.cpp

+      if (options.dtype() == at::kQInt8 || options.dtype() == at::kQUInt8 ||
+          options.dtype() == at::kQInt32) {
+        // get the first input and copy its quantization parameters
+        const auto& first_input = operands_[num_outputs_];


So what if the quantization parameters on the two tensors are different? That seems like a totally reasonable situation, and then copying the quantization parameters from the first input seems like a totally arbitrary choice.

If the correct quantization of the output tensor is something that varies from operator to operator, it may make sense to force kernels to do the computation of the quantization. There is some precedent for doing this in TensorIterator with the static_shape parameter, where kernels can say "Hey, I know you've got some built-in shape computation, but I actually happen to know what the output shape is, please use this." I could easily imagine something similar for quantization.

yeah, I don't think the current solution is super clean, I'm also not sure if the alternative would be better.

The two high level ways I saw to do this were:

add a quantized path to the current fp32 indexing logic (current PR). This reuses the size calculations and the kernels, but has to add some metadata for quantized tensors in places where it previously did not exist.

dispatch to something like quantized_index, which would have to reimplement the indexing logic (with some pieces potentially reusable from fp32, but likely not all)

Thoughts on any options I might be missing here? Does 1 sound like the right call?

for now, it's option 1, with the non-relevant parts asserted out, but I'm flexible

@vkuzo The nuance here is that the code paths you are editing in TensorIterator aren't just for fp32 indexing: they are for every unary, binary and reduction operation in PyTorch. So if you want to add something here, there is an obligation to at least have some plausible argument why the logic here is appropriate for all other operations.

I don't mind option one, but this PR ain't it. An implementation that more closely follows the idea of (1) is to take the existing indexing kernel (not in TensorIterator) and program TensorIterator on what the intended quantization result is.

aten/src/ATen/TensorIterator.cpp

ezyang · 2020-12-11T15:58:52Z

aten/src/ATen/TensorIterator.cpp

+          }
      } else {
          op.tensor = at::empty_strided(sizes, strides, options);
      }


Below, there is logic for handling what happens in the out= case. Imagine that you do indexing into a pre-existing quantized tensor. What should the quantization parameters be? What if the tensor is to be resized in this situation?

asserted it out for now

ezyang · 2020-12-11T16:00:30Z

The change to MetaBase::set_output looks incomplete. Oddly, the CI is passing, this is probably because none of the quantized operations have been made structured yet.

Summary: Implements support for the indexing of quantized tensors with lists of dims, such as ``` xq_slice = xq[:, [0], :, :] ``` If helpful for reviewers, the things originally broken were, in order: 1. `computeDeviceType` did not handle `DispatchKey::QuantizedCPU` (fix: added) 2. quantization params were not present in `TensorIterator::set_output` so they can be used to properly create the quantized tensor (fix: created `TensorQuantizationOptions` and threaded it through the relevant places) 3. `index` kernel was not enabled for quantized dtypes (fix: enable it) Note: this PR only handles per-Tensor qparams. We don't expect to need this for per-channel qparams any time soon, ideally we can pay the eng cost for enabling that when it is needed. Test Plan: ``` python test/test_quantization.py TestQuantizedOps.test_advanced_indexing ``` Reviewers: Subscribers: Tasks: Tags: Differential Revision: [D25451651](https://our.internmc.facebook.com/intern/diff/D25451651) [ghstack-poisoned]

vkuzo · 2020-12-12T23:15:58Z

The change to MetaBase::set_output looks incomplete. Oddly, the CI is passing, this is probably because none of the quantized operations have been made structured yet.

to clarify, do you mean accounting for the changes in #48718? Yes, that was not in the original PR, but is there in the latest update.

Summary: Implements support for the indexing of quantized tensors with lists of dims, such as ``` xq_slice = xq[:, [0], :, :] ``` If helpful for reviewers, the things originally broken were, in order: 1. `computeDeviceType` did not handle `DispatchKey::QuantizedCPU` (fix: added) 2. quantization params were not present in `TensorIterator::set_output` so they can be used to properly create the quantized tensor (fix: created `TensorQuantizationOptions` and threaded it through the relevant places) 3. `index` kernel was not enabled for quantized dtypes (fix: enable it) Note: this PR only handles per-Tensor qparams. We don't expect to need this for per-channel qparams any time soon, ideally we can pay the eng cost for enabling that when it is needed. Test Plan: ``` python test/test_quantization.py TestQuantizedOps.test_advanced_indexing ``` Reviewers: Subscribers: Tasks: Tags: Differential Revision: [D25451651](https://our.internmc.facebook.com/intern/diff/D25451651) [ghstack-poisoned]

Summary: Implements support for the indexing of quantized tensors with lists of dims, such as ``` xq_slice = xq[:, [0], :, :] ``` At least a few things need to happen before this being ready for review: 1. Verify if the general idea of `TensorAdditionalOptions` is the right abstraction 2. Verify if `TensorAdditionalOptions` needs the same style as `TensorOptions` (no optionals, etc) Test Plan: ``` python test/test_quantization.py TestQuantizedOps.test_advanced_indexing ``` Reviewers: Subscribers: Tasks: Tags: ghstack-source-id: 0966cb1 Pull Request resolved: #49129

…nced indexing" Summary: Implements support for the indexing of quantized tensors with lists of dims, such as ``` xq_slice = xq[:, [0], :, :] ``` If helpful for reviewers, the things originally broken were, in order: 1. `computeDeviceType` did not handle `DispatchKey::QuantizedCPU` (fix: added) 2. quantization params were not present in `TensorIterator::set_output` so they can be used to properly create the quantized tensor (fix: created `TensorQuantizationOptions` and threaded it through the relevant places) 3. `index` kernel was not enabled for quantized dtypes (fix: enable it) Note: this PR only handles per-Tensor qparams. We don't expect to need this for per-channel qparams any time soon, ideally we can pay the eng cost for enabling that when it is needed. Test Plan: ``` python test/test_quantization.py TestQuantizedOps.test_advanced_indexing ``` Reviewers: Subscribers: Tasks: Tags: Differential Revision: [D25451651](https://our.internmc.facebook.com/intern/diff/D25451651) [ghstack-poisoned]

Summary: Implements support for the indexing of quantized tensors with lists of dims, such as ``` xq_slice = xq[:, [0], :, :] ``` At least a few things need to happen before this being ready for review: 1. Verify if the general idea of `TensorAdditionalOptions` is the right abstraction 2. Verify if `TensorAdditionalOptions` needs the same style as `TensorOptions` (no optionals, etc) Test Plan: ``` python test/test_quantization.py TestQuantizedOps.test_advanced_indexing ``` Reviewers: Subscribers: Tasks: Tags: ghstack-source-id: d4ed3de Pull Request resolved: #49129

Summary: This is less ambitious redo of #49129. We make the ``` xq_slice = xq[:, [0], :, :] ``` indexing syntax work if `xq` is a quantized Tensor. For now, we are making the code not crash, with an in efficient `dq -> index -> q` implementation. A future PR can optimize performance by removing the unnecessary memory copies (which will require some non-trivial changes to TensorIterator). Test Plan: ``` python test/test_quantization.py TestQuantizedOps.test_advanced_indexing ``` Reviewers: Subscribers: Tasks: Tags: [ghstack-poisoned]

…for advanced indexing, try 2" Summary: This is less ambitious redo of #49129. We make the ``` xq_slice = xq[:, [0], :, :] ``` indexing syntax work if `xq` is a quantized Tensor. For now, we are making the code not crash, with an in efficient `dq -> index -> q` implementation. A future PR can optimize performance by removing the unnecessary memory copies (which will require some non-trivial changes to TensorIterator). Test Plan: ``` python test/test_quantization.py TestQuantizedOps.test_advanced_indexing ``` Reviewers: Subscribers: Tasks: Tags: Differential Revision: [D25539365](https://our.internmc.facebook.com/intern/diff/D25539365) [ghstack-poisoned]

…dexing, try 2" Summary: This is less ambitious redo of #49129. We make the ``` xq_slice = xq[:, [0], :, :] ``` indexing syntax work if `xq` is a quantized Tensor. For now, we are making the code not crash, with an in efficient `dq -> index -> q` implementation. A future PR can optimize performance by removing the unnecessary memory copies (which will require some non-trivial changes to TensorIterator). Test Plan: ``` python test/test_quantization.py TestQuantizedOps.test_advanced_indexing ``` Reviewers: Subscribers: Tasks: Tags: Differential Revision: [D25539365](https://our.internmc.facebook.com/intern/diff/D25539365) [ghstack-poisoned]

Summary: This is less ambitious redo of #49129. We make the ``` xq_slice = xq[:, [0], :, :] ``` indexing syntax work if `xq` is a quantized Tensor. For now, we are making the code not crash, with an in efficient `dq -> index -> q` implementation. A future PR can optimize performance by removing the unnecessary memory copies (which will require some non-trivial changes to TensorIterator). Test Plan: ``` python test/test_quantization.py TestQuantizedOps.test_advanced_indexing ``` Reviewers: Subscribers: Tasks: Tags: ghstack-source-id: 9540251 Pull Request resolved: #49346

…ed indexing, try 2" Summary: This is less ambitious redo of #49129. We make the ``` xq_slice = xq[:, [0], :, :] ``` indexing syntax work if `xq` is a quantized Tensor. For now, we are making the code not crash, with an in efficient `dq -> index -> q` implementation. A future PR can optimize performance by removing the unnecessary memory copies (which will require some non-trivial changes to TensorIterator). Test Plan: ``` python test/test_quantization.py TestQuantizedOps.test_advanced_indexing ``` Reviewers: Subscribers: Tasks: Tags: Differential Revision: [D25539365](https://our.internmc.facebook.com/intern/diff/D25539365) [ghstack-poisoned]

Summary: This is less ambitious redo of #49129. We make the ``` xq_slice = xq[:, [0], :, :] ``` indexing syntax work if `xq` is a quantized Tensor. For now, we are making the code not crash, with an in efficient `dq -> index -> q` implementation. A future PR can optimize performance by removing the unnecessary memory copies (which will require some non-trivial changes to TensorIterator). Test Plan: ``` python test/test_quantization.py TestQuantizedOps.test_advanced_indexing ``` Reviewers: Subscribers: Tasks: Tags: ghstack-source-id: c319b52 Pull Request resolved: #49346

…exing, try 2" Summary: This is less ambitious redo of #49129. We make the ``` xq_slice = xq[:, [0], :, :] ``` indexing syntax work if `xq` is a quantized Tensor. For now, we are making the code not crash, with an in efficient `dq -> index -> q` implementation. A future PR can optimize performance by removing the unnecessary memory copies (which will require some non-trivial changes to TensorIterator). Test Plan: ``` python test/test_quantization.py TestQuantizedOps.test_advanced_indexing ``` Reviewers: Subscribers: Tasks: Tags: Differential Revision: [D25539365](https://our.internmc.facebook.com/intern/diff/D25539365) [ghstack-poisoned]

Summary: This is less ambitious redo of #49129. We make the ``` xq_slice = xq[:, [0], :, :] ``` indexing syntax work if `xq` is a quantized Tensor. For now, we are making the code not crash, with an in efficient `dq -> index -> q` implementation. A future PR can optimize performance by removing the unnecessary memory copies (which will require some non-trivial changes to TensorIterator). Test Plan: ``` python test/test_quantization.py TestQuantizedOps.test_advanced_indexing ``` Reviewers: Subscribers: Tasks: Tags: ghstack-source-id: 7591b5f Pull Request resolved: #49346

#49346) Summary: Pull Request resolved: #49346 This is less ambitious redo of #49129. We make the ``` xq_slice = xq[:, [0], :, :] ``` indexing syntax work if `xq` is a quantized Tensor. For now, we are making the code not crash, with an in efficient `dq -> index -> q` implementation. A future PR can optimize performance by removing the unnecessary memory copies (which will require some non-trivial changes to TensorIterator). Test Plan: ``` python test/test_quantization.py TestQuantizedOps.test_advanced_indexing ``` Imported from OSS Reviewed By: jerryzh168 Differential Revision: D25539365 fbshipit-source-id: 98485875aaaf5743e1a940e170258057691be4fa

vkuzo · 2020-12-28T17:35:25Z

thanks for the review! We went with a simpler and less performant approach of using the fp32 kernel for now in #49346, we might revisit supporting this natively in the future.

pytorch#49346) Summary: Pull Request resolved: pytorch#49346 This is less ambitious redo of pytorch#49129. We make the ``` xq_slice = xq[:, [0], :, :] ``` indexing syntax work if `xq` is a quantized Tensor. For now, we are making the code not crash, with an in efficient `dq -> index -> q` implementation. A future PR can optimize performance by removing the unnecessary memory copies (which will require some non-trivial changes to TensorIterator). Test Plan: ``` python test/test_quantization.py TestQuantizedOps.test_advanced_indexing ``` Imported from OSS Reviewed By: jerryzh168 Differential Revision: D25539365 fbshipit-source-id: 98485875aaaf5743e1a940e170258057691be4fa

facebook-github-bot added the cla signed label Dec 10, 2020

vkuzo changed the title ~~[wip] quantized tensor: add support for advanced indexing~~ quantized tensor: add support for advanced indexing Dec 10, 2020

vkuzo requested review from bhosmer, ezyang and gchanan December 10, 2020 17:37

ezyang reviewed Dec 11, 2020

View reviewed changes

aten/src/ATen/TensorIterator.cpp Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

ezyang reviewed Dec 11, 2020

View reviewed changes

vkuzo requested a review from ezyang December 12, 2020 23:16

vkuzo mentioned this pull request Dec 14, 2020

quantized tensor: add preliminary support for advanced indexing, try 2 #49346

Closed

vkuzo closed this Dec 28, 2020

facebook-github-bot deleted the gh/vkuzo/184/head branch January 27, 2021 18:26

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

quantized tensor: add support for advanced indexing#49129

quantized tensor: add support for advanced indexing#49129
vkuzo wants to merge 5 commits intogh/vkuzo/184/basefrom
gh/vkuzo/184/head

vkuzo commented Dec 10, 2020 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

dr-ci bot commented Dec 10, 2020 •

edited by facebook-github-bot

Loading

Uh oh!

ezyang Dec 11, 2020

Uh oh!

ezyang Dec 11, 2020

Uh oh!

vkuzo Dec 12, 2020

Uh oh!

vkuzo Dec 12, 2020

Uh oh!

ezyang Dec 14, 2020

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

ezyang Dec 11, 2020

Uh oh!

vkuzo Dec 12, 2020

Uh oh!

ezyang commented Dec 11, 2020

Uh oh!

vkuzo commented Dec 12, 2020

Uh oh!

vkuzo commented Dec 28, 2020

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

3 participants

Conversation

vkuzo commented Dec 10, 2020 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

dr-ci bot commented Dec 10, 2020 • edited by facebook-github-bot Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

💊 CI failures summary and remediations

🕵️ 3 new failures recognized by patterns

pytorch_linux_xenial_py3_6_gcc5_4_build (1/3)

pytorch_linux_xenial_cuda9_2_cudnn7_py3_gcc5_4_build (2/3)

pytorch_linux_xenial_py3_clang5_asan_test2 (3/3)

Uh oh!

ezyang Dec 11, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

ezyang Dec 11, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

vkuzo Dec 12, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

vkuzo Dec 12, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

ezyang Dec 14, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

ezyang Dec 11, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

vkuzo Dec 12, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

ezyang commented Dec 11, 2020

Uh oh!

vkuzo commented Dec 12, 2020

Uh oh!

vkuzo commented Dec 28, 2020

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

3 participants

vkuzo commented Dec 10, 2020 •

edited

Loading

dr-ci bot commented Dec 10, 2020 •

edited by facebook-github-bot

Loading